The effect of irsogladine maleate, a widely used antiulcer drug in Japan, on indomethacin-induced small intestinal lesions was examined in rats. Animals without fasting were given indomethacin (10 mg/kg, s.c.) and sacrificed 24 h later. Irsogladine (1-10 mg/kg) or 16,16-dimethyl prostaglandin E2 (dmPGE2 0.03 mg/kg) was given p.o. twice, 0.5 before and 6 h after indomethacin, while ampicillin (800 mg/kg) was given twice, 18 and 0.5 h before. Indomethacin caused severe lesions in the small intestine, mainly the jejunum and ileum, accompanied by intestinal hypermotility, the up-regulation of inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) expression, and an increase of myeloperoxidase (MPO) activity as well as enterobacterial invasion in the mucosa. These events were all prevented by both dmPGE2 and ampicillin, except the intestinal hypermotility which was only prevented by dmPGE2. Likewise, irsogladine also significantly and dose-dependently prevented these lesions at > 1 mg/kg. This agent alone increased mucus secretion and significantly suppressed the decreased mucus response to indomethacin, resulting in a suppression of the bacterial invasion as well as the increase in MPO activity and iNOS expression. The protective effect of irsogladine was mimicked by isobutylmethylxanthine, a nonselective inhibitor of phosphodiesterase (PDE), as well as rolipram, a selective PDE4 inhibitor. These results suggest that irsogladine protects the small intestine against indomethacin-induced lesions, and this effect may be associated with the increased mucus secretion, probably due to the inhibitory actions of PDE, resulting in suppression of enterobacterial invasion and iNOS expression.

Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), a fundamental regulator of angiogenesis, plays an important role in gastric ulcer healing. In addition, prostaglandin E2 (PGE2), derived from cyclooxygenase-2, stimulates VEGF release in gastric fibroblasts. In the present study, we examined which EP receptor subtype is involved in the expression of VEGF in primary rat gastric fibroblasts. PGE2 stimulated VEGF protein expression in the fibroblasts in a time- and dose-dependent manner. The up-regulation by PGE2 of VEGF expression was completely inhibited by a subtype selective EP4 receptor antagonist (AE3-208). Furthermore, the selective EP4 receptor agonist, AE1-329, promoted VEGF expression in the fibroblasts, and this effect was also totally antagonized by AE3-208. These results suggest that PGE2 stimulates VEGF expression in gastric fibroblasts through the activation of EP4 receptors, and this effect may be involved in the healing promoting action of PGE2 on gastric ulcers.

These results suggest that urocortin 1 prevents indomethacin-induced small intestinal lesions, and that this action is mediated by the activation of CRFR2 and is functionally associated with the suppression of the intestinal hypermotility response caused by indomethacin. It is assumed that endogenous CRF contributes to the maintenance of the mucosal defensive ability of the small intestine against indomethacin through the activation of CRFR2.

BackgroundChemotherapy-induced oral mucositis impairs the quality of life. The difference in severity of oral mucositis between different anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibodies combined with cytotoxic drugs in colorectal cancer is unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in oral mucositis between panitumumab (Pmab) and cetuximab (Cmab) combined with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU).MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study. A total of 75 colorectal cancer outpatients treated with an anti-EGFR antibody combined with FOLFOX, FOLFIRI, or 5-FU/leucovorin as the first- to third-line treatment were included. The primary endpoint was the incidence of grade 2–3 oral mucositis. The secondary endpoint was the time to onset of oral mucositis. We also compared the incidence of toxicities of interest, skin toxicity, hypomagnesaemia and neutropenia, and time to treatment failure (TTF) between the two groups.ResultsThirty-two patients treated with Pmab and 43 patients treated with Cmab were evaluated. Patient characteristics were similar between the two groups. The incidence of grade 2–3 oral mucositis was significantly higher with Pmab than with Cmab (31.3% vs 9.3%, P < 0.05). Moreover, the incidence of grade 3 oral mucositis was significantly higher in patients treated with Pmab (18.8% vs 0%, P < 0.01). The mean (SD) cycles to onset of the worst oral mucositis was 3.0 (2.9) in the Pmab group and 2.3 (1.7) in the Cmab group (P = 0.29). Oral mucositis was characterized by glossitis and cheilitis. The incidences of other toxicities were the following (Pmab vs Cmab): grade 2–3 skin toxicity: 68.8% vs 74.4% (P = 0.61), grade 2–3 hypomagnesaemia: 9.3% vs 7.0% (P = 1.00), grade 3–4 neutropenia: 28.1% vs 37.2% (P = 0.46). The median TTF was not significantly different, i.e., 223 days vs 200 days (P = 0.39) for Pmab vs Cmab.ConclusionsPmab-based chemotherapy resulted in significantly higher grades of oral mucositis compared with Cmab-based chemotherapy. The oral condition should be monitored carefully and early supportive care should be provided for patients treated with Pmab-based chemotherapy.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-018-4862-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract